Why medical bills are a good thing.

[aurther61287]

me and my buddies enjoy having huge cop shootouts in free roam. guess what we cant do this now because it costs us too much money (mainly cause cops shooting is ridiculously good in online). medical bills has no impact on us and pvp anyway cause we prefer most the time to playing in private servers. but we cant have the same kinda fun as we could in gta 4 because of the BS medical bills.

 

making consequences in a game is good, making it so that you dont want to have fun because it costs you time/money. thats a problem that needs to be fixed rockstar.

[buddybravo]

Having fun is too expensive even in video games. I'll just sit in my apartment staring at the TV while I sit in my apartment staring at the TV.

Edited October 16, 2013 by buddybravo

[Screenshot]

I think the consequences are too big. Just think about, let's say you have 100k in your bank, suddenly everyone in your session start killing everyone, and you feel like being a part of the war, after 5 minutes and 10 deaths you lost about 20k so now you have 80k left, Sure if you are high rank you will get the money back from 1 mission, but most legit players who don't have all the time in the world, wont be that high of a rank, 20k in their eyes is more than some weekend allowance. Sure i might be exeggerating a bit, but you will most likely be killing each other for more than 5 minutes and you will be dying more than 10 times. Medical bill's is a good money sink, but it almost makes you completly broke. In my opinion you should lose 500-1000$ every death. This way they wont lose sh*tload of money, they will still lose a fair amount of their money, depeneding on how many times they die, but it's better than loosing 2000$ every death.

 

This is my opinion.

[nexoric]

Just no. God damn.

I like to screw around in this game and by the time I notice, I am down 10-15 grand...

That makes my boner all soft.

[stockwiz]

Good arguments against this whole punishment system. I can see how this system would work if people only did missions and did not want to screw around at all randomly killing each other, but it does prevent interaction because you know you will lose so much cash for dying.

 

I'd say fix the price of the cost of death to .5% (a half a percent) of a person's total liquid net worth (stocks and bank account) . You have $100k? You get charged $500. You have a million dollars? You get charged $5000. You have 10 million dollars? You get charged $50,000. You have $64000? You pay $320.

 

The rich subsidize the poor. That's how it works in real life... like a flat tax. This would also prevent those with a ton of money from simply going on a killing spree because they know they can easily eat the $2000 bill.

Edited October 16, 2013 by stockwiz

[Courtesy Flush George]

You gotta be trolling... Right?!

[Daemian]

They're great, but $2000 is too much, more when some asshole is just killing you a couple of times. They could be reduced a little amount, not 2 k everytime you die.

[Wanted Assailant]

You're right. Let's make it even more realistic, and make the medical bills $10,000.

[Yakito]

I keep seeing people that are complaining over the medical bills that you have when you die in free roam. But I've figured out that you don't realize what it's actually for. Imagine the game WITHOUT the bills. At first thought, you'd think it would be great. You wouldn't lost any money from dying, and you could actually not worry about it. But that's the point. Without the medical bills, there's absolutely NO consequence for dying. If there's absolutely no weight involved with killing somebody, then there's really no point in doing it all. So please stop complaining. It's a good feature that actually has an intelligent purpose.

Bullsh*t. Tell my 40k, that I lost due to a group of assholes, that it's good to have medical bills.

I am pissed off, I am not happy. I did not enjoy this sh*tty little griefing contest at all. IF I didn't have to pay I wouldn't feel like there's this weird stupid pressure. But there is, and medical bills take a lot of GTA out of GTA.

So... I honestly, really fcking hate you for endorsing medical bills. I hope there's a special place in hell for you.

[stockwiz]

Those costs sound too high? Could charge .25% for a death instead.

 

If you have millions of dollars you should be able to double it with relative ease once the stock market opens.. that would help offset high medical costs.

 

My point is a fixed percentage system would help keep the real wealthy from just going around causing mayhem while keeping those with not much money from going bankrupt. It would balance things more than the current, fixed system does and reduce medical costs for most people.

 

How about this... minimum cost of medical care is $100 and max cost of care is $10,000 with .25% charged in between

 

So in summary... the cost of medical care based on money in banks and stocks with this system would be:

 

Under $40,000: Fixed $100 cost

$40,000 to 4,000,000 ... a quarter of one percent of this amount

over $4,000,000 ... $10,000

 

The percentage could be tweaked up or down to increase or decrease costs. I had to edit this post to get the math right.

Edited October 16, 2013 by stockwiz

[Yakito]

This shouldn't be negotiated with Rockstar.

"oh, take a percentage of somebody's money instead".
No, that wouldn't work either.

Medical bills SUCK, period.

[Ertrick36]

I actually just liked the original idea...

 

Though it's only because as soon as I earn anything more than $1,000, I just immediately deposit it into my bank account via the Maze Bank website

 

I do it so much, it's just become a habit. Though this may explain why R* chose a medical bill approach.

 

Though even without any sort of monetary punishment, I still hate getting killed. I try to avoid death as often as possible.

[petenasty]

The bill is a horrible idea that got the game off on a really bad foot. While normally I would keep voice chat open, and I would approach strangers, now if someone is within eyesight of me I will have a gun drawn until they are gone. I let no one not in my crew or on my friends anywhere near me because I refuse to lose money.

 

It also discourages the fun of a GTA game in favor of a "Sim" feel. Messing around with your friends is now a very expensive hobby. Fighting the cops is a guaranteed way to lose thousands. Briefing is made worse because not only do you die, you lose money and the killer gets $100 of your cash. This is the most unfair, terribly planned mechanic hahaha. It places all of the weight on you, the one being trolled, and the person being a dick doesn't get hit with anything unless he blows up your car.

 

I refuse to go after any bounty that isn't $9k. Dying cuts into the profit. Ain't worth it. Never good fun fights either, I usually die via invisible sticky bomb that lands somewhere near me.

 

And the spawns? Whoever said they are fine is wrong. Sometimes you have the distance you need but most of the time, you're going to spawn in and as soon as your timer runs out there is a car going 150 MPH already on your toes. Over and over and over. Hell, I made some guy earlier lose $20k before he quit cause he blew up my helicopter and stranded me on a mountain, and he kept spawning down scope of my sniper rifle. Plus I was going after a $9k bounty earlier, got killed a block away, and spawned next to him. Behind his cover. Inside the building he was in. Collect and move on.

 

I'd say keep the bills for NPC deaths but this even pushing it because most free roam firefights against the AI is like painting a neon target on your face and tying a bullet magnet to your chest. But against players, drop the penalty, remove it, or have it at least only count once or twice. Right now it discourages everything GTA is pushing us to do (fight other players, do crazy things, engage police, fight over world objectives, etc). Even if I have a ton of cash once I die twice I reevaluate if I want to be in that area or not.

[Hover_Mode]

yea, only retards reject the idea

[AzraelX]

Spawn killing is almost impossible. The respawn location isn't right next to the person that killed you. It gives you enough time to run, and you're invincible for around 3-5 seconds after you respawn.

 

Not to mention that you can just switch sessions, or if you really want to try escaping, you can call Lester to have your blip hidden on the radar.

 

Either way, death in free roam needs consequence to make the gameplay meaningful. The benefits are pretty obvious, so anyone who didn't already understand that probably isn't reasonable enough to listen to anything you have to say.

[stockwiz]

agreed... death does need consequence, but 2 percent is too much.. they just want people buying cash cards. You have to play like a saint to not lose a lot of money with the current system, and people who exploit or have millions have a relatively high amount of power and freedom to cause problems compared to people who don't. $2,000 is nothing for someone with 4 million. Why shouldn't they go around killing low level people for fun?

Edited October 16, 2013 by stockwiz

[God-eater]

Actually by making players lose money upon death all this did was lead to players steering clear of each other in free roam and reducing player interaction to the bare minimum. The only time player interaction ever really takes place is among a group of friends. Among a group of strangers? Don't hold your breath.

 

 

 

Plus griefers are having a field day with this penalty and shooting players repeatedly for entertainment of knowing they're draining their bank accounts dry. Plus after listening to free roam game chat for awhile I seen that players preferred threat is killing you repeatedly and draining you of tens of thousands of dollars.

 

Back in Gta 4 player interaction happened cause players were more willing to try and interact with strangers because they had nothing to lose. If they encounter a player who is totally focused on killing others then he can just shake it off, move on, and find another player who would be more mature.

 

If they insist on keeping this penalty system then my suggestion is that players don't lose money when killed by another player, taking the wind out of the sails of griefers so to speak.

 

All of this - PKing is used as a griefing tactic because the victim loses something - 2K a pop - and as we know the thing that griefers love most is knowing they've taken something away from someone else.

 

I completely agree that the current arrangement is discouraging random co-ops - before I gave up and started playing exclusively in Closed Friend sessions, I was avoiding all other players like the plague - if anyone came within a block of me, I bailed - if they followed me, I'd either leave the session or ambush them and THEN leave the session (I'm trying to sell a car to make money, not get caught up in a 30-minute vendetta that will cost me $10K in deaths). I swapped to Closed sessions when I realised that I was spending roughly 80% of my time watching my back to avoid getting auto-aimed by every single player I see (well, more to the point, every player who sees me first - I see you first, you don't see me at all).

 

If playing in open sessions didn't have the potential to drain away my hard-earned cash (not a glitcher, so to lose 10K in 5 mins still hurts), I'd meet the griefers head-on - I imagine plenty of other people would, too - but as it stands you feel like as soon as someone comes after you your choices are leave or expend some resources and then leave.

 

Just once, I'd like to fly over a cornered player, decide on a whim to airlift them out , pick them up, get them out, drop them off, become besties and name our kids after each other. You know, instead of the little sh*t headshotting me and then getting shredded by the cops as he tries in vain to spool up the chopper from cold start (respawned in time to watch it happen - idiot).

 

That experience is repeated in one form or another every single time I go anywhere near another player and I have never had a different experience. My response is I'm not playing with randoms anymore.

Edited October 16, 2013 by God-eater

[SOHC_VTEC]

Save your money on med bills by buying ammo

[Elijin]

The real problem with medical bills and insurance is how poorly set up they are.

 

The trouble makers simply spend all their money before they go harass people. Which means instead of a situation where as you outlined, death is something to be wary of, they can charge headlong into danger to cause problems for the other players, because there is no risk for them.

[73duster]

Your a f*cking idiot

Completely ignorant and juvenile response.

[SultanOfRS]

I'm inclined to believe that a game without med bills would lead to more player engagement. As it stands, people are hesitant to approach another white dot because players like to shoot on sight. If I had no penalty, then I'd feel safer in my attempt to extract revenge. I started off GTAO as a generally nice person but when I got shot for coming out of a clothing store, I simply lost it.

[73duster]

The problem isn't that there are medical bills, OR that they are expensive. The problem is that many people are being attacked relentlessly when they are simply trying to roam around and do many of the OTHER things that don't involve killing other players.

Passive mode does NOT work as intended, because people still run you over with vehicles. If YOU happen to use a car to get somewhere, you can STILL be shot.

There are already a ton of ways that you can die in this game, and in that scenario, a $2K hospital bill is perfect. However, being constantly killed by douchebags is bad enough without having your bank account drained on top of it.

I actually love that money FINALLY has real value, and death has more consequences, but something needs to be done about griefing, because the Bad Sport system isn't cutting it.

[Elijin]

Quick question to a lot of people here:

Why does death need consequence in a game series which was previously characterised by things like 'Who can die in the most epic and hilarious way in free roam?'

I get some games need consequences, but GTA was previously a game where one of the main activities was getting yourself killed.

[73duster]

Quick question to a lot of people here:

 

Why does death need consequence in a game series which was previously characterised by things like 'Who can die in the most epic and hilarious way in free roam?'

 

I get some games need consequences, but GTA was previously a game where one of the main activities was getting yourself killed.

Because there are already an endless choice of games where killing has no consequences, and hence become quite dull because of it.

Secondly, MANY of us begged Rockstar to give money REAL value, which is one of the biggest complaints from past GTA titles. Who cares about how much money you have if there's nothing to do with it? Or if there aren't ways to lose it?

[mastershake616]

Live dangerously and pay. Plain and simple.

[Revoltion]

I think you should be charged for medical bills if you 'commit suicide' but I think the bill should be reduced and not increase as the money in your bank increases. But I think it MIGHT be a good idea if there is no bill (or at least a smaller one) if you are killed by someone else, or maybe the person who killed you could incur a small penalty that doesn't involve money. I know there are some already, but they're obviously not working.

[Officer620]

Live dangerously and pay. Plain and simple.

 

I too want to live my GTA life not doing crazy stuff that could get me killed. I personally don't leave my apartment because I might die.

 

Good argument.

 

Cheers!